EnviroLink Forum

I'm having a hard time deciding which 'herd-critter' from Earth will be the main-stay for the colonists in my story.

Here are the choices I've narrowed down to:

Reindeer
Llama's
Cattle
Goats

Which of these critters, basically, has the most to 'offer' human-kind?

I don't see chickens in there.

*******************
I would think that your choice would be partly based on the availability of the correct pasture type available for your animals.

Good responses, all. You folk are very sharp today!

I guess I don't think of chickens(Or other fowl) as 'herd' critters. But clearly, they'd have to be allowed. Eggs are too important a food source to ignore!

What the colonists wish to do is use 'free-range' feeding with thier 'agri-critters'. Allow said critters to graze the native range, is the idea. There's plenty of native plant-stuff but it's on the dry side and the days are rather hot; followed by nights that are rather cold.

The multi-pul meat-sources are good sense, Animal lover. The colonists will be very eager to introduce earth-fish into the lakes...(With possible bad effects)

Rodents? Rabbits, maybe!

That is exactly one of the things they will have to come to terms with, Animal lover. In the early going; without so very many folk to feed, things'll be neato. Once they start getting 'spread out', things could get complicated. For example; what if that first harvest is poor? Will 'free-range' be tossed aside for factory-produced? Is the colony government going to 'enforce' organic farming... or will they allow everyone to decide for them selves how they wish to farm?

Colonists would have to consider the volume of the animals required, so the larger animals would have to be much better suited for the environment or really have outstanding benefits.

Something like a guinea pig would provide a fast reproduction and some fur based mateial for clothing. Goats, llama, and cattle all can provide meat, milk, and leather. The goat is smaller and has a greater range of consumable diet. The fowl also are small, but they also have issues with survivability as they tolerate fewer changes in atmosphere than other animals. The variable are considerable and would require a two or three species coverage of the more compact animals in the beginning. Over time larger animals would be added but only if contact and transport were mainatained.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

Animal lover- pre-existing critters: Yes- many of them. Some may prove useful in time.
But to be certain they don't cause damage to the local food-chains, the colonists choose to leave-off tinkering with the local wildlife for a year or so till they're certain they do no irreparable damage. That's the official line, of course. Pouching(sadly) begins almost the minute the first colonist steps off the landing shuttles!

Wayne: Well-thought out response. I left out howgs, I see. I'd seriously consider them, since they eat just about anything thrown at them.

There's going to be a bit of a break(10 to 15 years!) between the initial colony-ship and the 'follow-on' effords: so basically, the colonists are mostly on their own. That seems to suggest goats are the best bet; at least as a main-stay. "back-up' sources would be wise, of course.

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.

Goats, definitely, for milk & meat, but also because they can thrive on such a varied diet.

Also consider rabbits, which are a very efficient meat producers requiring very little space and can be fed a grass & weed diet. Did you know that in a year a single doe can produce meat equal to an entire beef carcass? Much more efficient than cavies (guinea pigs), which are smaller and have a longer gestation period than a rabbit. Oh, and if there are greenhouses in your story, some rabbit breeders keep the rabbits in a row of cages along the center of the greenhouse to provide some heating, use the manure to fertilize the plants, and feed plant wastes back to the rabbits. Very efficient, and you'll end up with lots of nice warm fur, too!

With the conditions you describe, I'd agree with Supertwist. Goats eat just about anything and would handle heat better then cattle. Being of smaller size then cattle their water requirements wouldn't be as great. Plus you get both meat and dairy from the same animal.

And here I never thought I'd have anything good to say about a goat after I said, here let me load them up for you. Boy was I glad to see them gone.

_________________
I don't know what your problem is but I bet its hard to pronounce.

The line-up at the moment:

Goats
Rabbits
Fresh water fish

Jury is still out on fowl---I'd like them but Waybe brought up survivualbility.(Hows that for spelling? Or lack therein?)
No votes on howgs, either way?
Dinner table is going to be a might plain, I think. Reducing meat-consumption wouldn't be a bad idea; in fact, if going 'green', it's just about neccasary.